ORDA's operating loss increases year over year

tjf1967 wrote

 What are we suppsoed to refute.  The only i got out of your post is that your not happy with something.  I wont refute that.

 
Weally ? U no reed sew good and U no speak sew good.

Kindly remove the blinders. Put down the Kool aid.

Snowballs wrote

Ya see, it's been well covered by the media when the state grants them money for projects, BR, Lookout, etc.

Got it?

I'm virtually certain those projects weren't funded, in whole or in part, through state grants.  I think you're using terms of art and you're not even aware of it.  that's more of the not knowing what you don't know thing.

Noah John wrote

Snowballs wrote

Ya see, it's been well covered by the media when the state grants them money for projects, BR, Lookout, etc.

Got it?

I'm virtually certain those projects weren't funded, in whole or in part, through state grants.  I think you're using terms of art and you're not even aware of it.  that's more of the not knowing what you don't know thing.

What, are you trying to play tomato tomoto potato pototo patty cake ?

Noah John wrote

Are there any GAAP compliant P/L statements (I'm not an accountant so that may not be artfully expressed) available for Gore and WF individually?  Perhaps they wouldn't end the discussion (for everyone anyway) but they'd be a good starting point.

No, there aren't.  Just ORDA as a whole.  I posted the link in my previous post this afternoon.  That's why I questioned Scotty earlier.

Noah John wrote

That post is so silly.  How do you know they don't pay for infrastructure improvements?  If those expenses are put on their line than they may well have "paid" for them from an accounting perspective even if the actual funds originated from general revenue.  But that's true for any organization. I don't know that WF (or Gore) even have a "line".    Is there a separate Whiteface (or Gore) P and L statement?  I dunno.  I'll bet you don't either.

I think it's hilarious that those of you who pretty obviously know the least about how this stuff is accounted for (and maybe about accounting in general) seem to have the strongest opinions about it...

ORDA's P&L for the fiscal year ended 3/31/13 includes depreciation expense in the amount of $6.9 million.  The previous year was $6.7 million.  So yes, the cost of property, plant and equipment ("infrastructure improvements") is accounted for in ORDA's P&L.  The infrastructure costs are depreciated over 20 to 40 years, the costs of assets with shorter useful lives (like vehicles) are depreciated over 3 to 10 years.

Snowballs wrote

Noah John wrote

Snowballs wrote

Ya see, it's been well covered by the media when the state grants them money for projects, BR, Lookout, etc.

Got it?

I'm virtually certain those projects weren't funded, in whole or in part, through state grants.  I think you're using terms of art and you're not even aware of it.  that's more of the not knowing what you don't know thing.

What, are you trying to play tomato tomoto potato pototo patty cake ?

Not at all.  Do you have a source for your claim that budget appropriations to Whiteface or Gore are never accounted for in some type of P and L statement?  If the next thing you post is anything other than that source I'm not interested in continuing this conversation.  

Thank you!

So ORDA accounts for its revenues and expenditures as a whole (not surprising and certainly valid).  Within that accounting there is no breakdown by venue (or "department" in more general bureaucratic speak)?

And surprise, surprise - those infrastructure appropriations are captured on an ORDA P and L statement.  Did anybody really think they weren't - other than snowballs?

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/540630/ORDA-operating-loss-swells-despite-revenue-gains.html?nav=5008

Noah John wrote

Snowballs wrote

Noah John wrote

Snowballs wrote

Ya see, it's been well covered by the media when the state grants them money for projects, BR, Lookout, etc.

Got it?

I'm virtually certain those projects weren't funded, in whole or in part, through state grants.  I think you're using terms of art and you're not even aware of it.  that's more of the not knowing what you don't know thing.

What, are you trying to play tomato tomoto potato pototo patty cake ?

Not at all.  Do you have a source for your claim that budget appropriations to Whiteface or Gore are never accounted for in some type of P and L statement?  If the next thing you post is anything other than that source I'm not interested in continuing this conversation.

Well, I didn't say never oh deceptive one BUT before you run off here's an example ! Last paragraph......

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/540630/ORDA-operating-loss-swells-despite-revenue-gains.html?nav=5008

That was easy !

Dude, you don't have a clue.  I'm done with you.

Perhaps jeff will be so kind as to tell us if these additional income sources are reported by ORDA. Keep in mind that just because there's an entry or a P & L statement it does not prove much. Think Enron, Savings and loan, and hundreds of others.

" Unlike most state public authorities, ORDA also receives financial support from the state, the town of North Elba, and other state authorities: the Empire State Development Corporation and the New York Power Authority. "

I just read the article.

It seems to be saying that last year with all the venues includes, operating loss was $7M and when you ad Bell to the mix this year you got a loss of $10M.

If correct the article headline somewhat oversimplifies what is going on. That loss is moved from the DEC to ORDA.

 

Noah John wrote

(And you really should learn the difference between "effect" and "affect".  You've apparently mastered the intricacies of state and local finance but eighth grade English fundamentals continue to allude you.)

Elude

Coach Z wrote

 I'm not really sure what benefit the union provides to the Orda employees.  Maybe some one can educate us on that. It certainly hurt ski instructors in this case though.

*my info is 5  years out of date, so take it with a grain of salt, or the whole shakerFull time seasonal orda employees in the bargaining unit received 4 paid holidays and 1 paid personal day over the course of the winter.  With the withholding from paycheck over the course of Nov to April it basically was a wash.

witch hobble wrote

 

Noah John wrote

(And you really should learn the difference between "effect" and "affect".  You've apparently mastered the intricacies of state and local finance but eighth grade English fundamentals continue to allude you.)

Elude

Good one.  When correcting someone's spelling, usage or grammar - don't make similar mistakes.

witch hobble wrote

 

Noah John wrote

(And you really should learn the difference between "effect" and "affect".  You've apparently mastered the intricacies of state and local finance but eighth grade English fundamentals continue to allude you.)

Elude

Ha ha ha ! Him no Noah what him thinks him Noah !

" I'm virtually certain that's more of the not knowing what you don't know thing. "

Yea, that! ^^^^

Noah John wrote

witch hobble wrote

 

Noah John wrote

(And you really should learn the difference between "effect" and "affect".  You've apparently mastered the intricacies of state and local finance but eighth grade English fundamentals continue to allude you.)

Elude

Good one.  When correcting someone's spelling, usage or grammar - don't make similar mistakes.

The use of "allude" was obviously sarcastic Noah.  Or maybe not so obvious?  

That said, while many of us may not agree with Benny's statements, I imagine that quite a few forum members are more displeased with the change in tone of this forum brought about by you and your cronies.  

Snowballs wrote

Adk Jeff wrote

  Isn’t it possible that all of the venues, including Gore and WF, operate at a loss?

Hell no. Why does this keep popping up ? It's absolutely ridiculous ! What is wrong with you people ? Talk about wearing blinders just because you ski there......

LOOK.... Neither Gore nor Whiteface ever had to pay for their property, it's buildings or infrastructure. NO MORTGAGE PAYMENT EVER!
Neither has to pay any Fed or State income tax. NONE!
Neither has to pay ANY taxes what so ever. NONE!
Neither has to pay for ANY capital improvements. NONE!
Both get discounted vehicles and fuel.
On and On and On.
YET BOTH charge as much as the high price private areas.
Private areas all have to pay these huge costs and yet they make money. How can anybody with a lick of common sense speculate whether Gore/WF turns a profit ?

Despite all these HUGE cost saving benefits you people keep speculating  " Oh gee, I wonder if they're making money " "You can't expect a state mtn to make money " or...

Harvey wrote

On Topic:  These mountains have to be subsidized to maintain infrastructure.

Completely and utterly ridiculous and stupid. Yea stupid !
Private mtns pay taxes, mortages, etc AND pay for their own improvements AND they make a tidy profit !
So, all these huge cost savings and the state/n.elba kick in another 5 mill...... and Orda operates at a loss or bare bones profit ?
OMG!!!  What a bunch of boob bait for the bubbas. Kool-Aid for the kiddies. Unfriggin real.
It's a State Agency. State Agencies are very well known for dishonesty and corruption.

Snowballs, I'm not here to argue whether the ski areas or any of ORDA's other venues make or lose money on a stand-alone basis.  My point was that we only have profitability information for ORDA as a whole, so anyone who says that the ski areas make money (or lose money) on a stand-alone basis is speculating.

Many of your points are valid.  You are correct that Gore & WF pay no state or federal income taxes and no property taxes.  But they do pay for their improvements - the lifts, lodges, snowmaking equipment, groomers, etc - as we established a few posts back.  They don't have financing costs for those improvements though.   A private entity would have to fund those improvements from retained earnings (i.e. "pay cash") or fund the improvements with a stock issuance, bonds or bank borrowing.  ORDA doesn't have to do that.

But there's more to it than that.  Gore and WF don't have revenues from resort lodging and real estate development that places like Jay or Stowe do.  ORDA's also got some very high benefits costs, presumably due to post-retirement pensions and healthcare that state employees are eligible for.  Look at their benefits ($8 million "payroll added costs") as a % of wages ($14 million hourly, mgt, OT and sick/vacation).  That's well over 50%.  Typical private business benefits run maybe 35% of wages.

So trying to determine Gore's or WF's profitability or comparing Gore and WF to other ski resorts is a doomed apples-to-oranges exercise.  And don't assume that other private ski areas are profitable.  Do you think Jay, Stowe and Hunter for example are profitable?  They may be, but we don't know because they are private businesses and their financial statements aren't publicly disclosed.  There are only a few public companies in the ski industry.  Vail Resorts is one. (Link).  Peak Resorts (Mount Snow, Wildcat) was going to go public about 2 yrs ago but withdrew their offering.  IntraWest (Tremblant, Stratton) used to be public but was taken private.  Just because Vail Associates was profitable last year ($59 million before-tax profit on $1.2 billion in gross revenue) doesn't mean that Gore or WF is (or should be).

A better debate would be the question of whether ORDA's operating loss of $8.5 million is "worth it."  To me, it's a no-brainer win in terms of the $300 million (ballpark) regional economic impact.  

Snowballs wrote

Perhaps jeff will be so kind as to tell us if these additional income sources are reported by ORDA.

Yes, those additional revenue sources are in the P&L.  Sponsorships and in-kind contributions provided $1.1 million last year.  

Snowballs wrote

Keep in mind that just because there's an entry or a P & L statement it does not prove much. Think Enron, Savings and loan, and hundreds of others.

Well, these are audited by an independent CPA firm.  They are certified to present fairly the financial position and operating results.  I'll take them at face value in the absence of any specific information that makes the financials suspicious.

One last thought, and I've said this three times now in this thread.  The results quoted in the Adirondack Enterprise article are practically meaningless.  They are 7-month results, April-October.  The vast majority of ORDA’s revenue is generated in the other 5 months of the year.  Full year results would be far more meaningful.

Adk Jeff wrote

...

In case you didn't guess Jeff is a pro and knows how to read financials. Thank you very much Jeff.

The last time I tried to make my way through that stuff was about 3 years ago.  (Now I leave it up to Jeff).

What I saw was for all venues (I think), added up to zero and included something like $3M coming from the state.  It made me assume that the whole operation needed a little help to make it all work. (No big deal to me).

There were not infrastructure numbers in it that I saw.

I am not clear on where money for new lifts comes from.  Burnt Ridge Quad was 5M - was that completely financed or did the state help?  I assumed there was tax money making that happen.

Much of the new snow gun stuff at Gore has come through energy grants. But there was some cash outlay too.  Not sure how that is paid for but in the long run those HKD lower operating cost.

Thanks Jeff.  This issue is actually not that interesting to me.  Whether or not ORDA or an individual venue shows a "profit" is not the question because, as Pants pointed out yesterday, that's not the mission.  The economic benefit to the area (which, incidentally, does increase state and local coffers through bed and sales taxes, income taxes from job creation, etc. none of which is captured in these financials) is clear and obvious and makes the state's investment a "no brainer" to borrow Jeff's phrase.  I'm always more interested in what motivates guys like snowballs and Benny Profane.  What axe are they grinding when they tote this issue out every year?  Are they just offended that NYS is in the business of operating a few ski areas regardless of whether it does so well, efficiently or with some definable "return"?  Are they bothered by the fact that a couple of their tax dollars may go to benefit some region of the state other than their own?  What "kool aid" have we all supposedly drank?  I just don't get their perennial angst over this stuff.

Harvey wrote

 

In case you didn't guess Jeff is a pro and knows how to read financials.  

I thought it was my job to point out the obvious

Thanks for that Jeff.

Noah John wrote

Thanks Jeff.  This issue is actually not that interesting to me.  Whether or not ORDA or an individual venue shows a "profit" is not the question because, as Pants pointed out yesterday, that's not the mission.  The economic benefit to the area (which, incidentally, does increase state and local coffers through bed and sales taxes, income taxes from job creation, etc. none of which is captured in these financials) is clear and obvious and makes the state's investment a "no brainer" to borrow Jeff's phrase.  I'm always more interested in what motivates guys like snowballs and Benny Profane.  What axe are they grinding when they tote this issue out every year?  Are they just offended that NYS is in the business of operating a few ski areas regardless of whether it does so well, efficiently or with some definable "return"?  Are they bothered by the fact that a couple of their tax dollars may go to benefit some region of the state other than their own?  What "kool aid" have we all supposedly drank?  I just don't get their perennial angst over this stuff.

Oh crap ... I just spilled my Kool Aid.